[ad_1]
President Biden moved swiftly in his early days to begin implementing his agenda, signing executive orders and outlining new actions aimed at raising the economy, tackling climate change, and closing the racial wealth gap. But his most significant move could actually be a reaffirmation of an old position – that the Senate should protect the filibuster, the 60-vote threshold that for years prevented expansive legislation, including on issues it he is now seeking to resolve.
Progressive growls over filibuster increased this week after Minority Leader Senator Mitch McConnell initially refused to agree to basic house rules of operation unless Democrats agree to uphold procedural tactics. But that remained only a growl, reflecting the desire of progressives to avoid intra-partisan warfare early in Mr. Biden’s term and their belief, shared more widely in Washington, that his hand could eventually be forced.
Some say Mr Biden, and Senate resisters, will accept the idea once Republicans block popular legislation, like the John Lewis Voting Rights Act, named after the civil rights hero who died last year. . Others believe Mr. Biden’s desire to be seen as a transformational president will overwhelm his instinct as a Washington traditionalist.
“We have to recognize that the Senate has fundamentally changed since the time President Biden served,” said Senator Ed Markey of Massachusetts, a progressive who endorsed the elimination of filibuster. “And it was impossible to move forward on big problems.”
“You cannot be unrealistically nostalgic for a time that does not return,” he added. “The Senate is not returning to a previous state.”
Mr. Biden’s pledge to keep the Senate obstructed is reminiscent of the political debates that animated the Democratic presidential primary. At that point, candidates including Senators Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Kamala Harris of California – Mr Biden’s eventual vice president and vice president – expressed openness to the elimination. filibuster or have directly called for its removal.
Their logic was informed by years of congressional blockade under former President Barack Obama and by the scale of the challenges the country faced: Big problems need big solutions, they argued, and filibuster. was a blockade to progress. Mr Biden himself has expressed some willingness to rethink his position last summer, under pressure to unite the ideological wings of the party and defeat Donald J. Trump.
“It will depend on their stubbornness,” Biden said of Republicans at the time.
Now in office, it appears he has closed that window – a reflection of a campaign focused on working across party lines and his history as a negotiator in Washington respectful of bipartisan civility.
With the Senate split 50-50 between Democrats and Republicans, that could allow Mr McConnell and a small group of moderate voices to block almost any piece of legislation. This could doom Mr Biden to the same fate as his Democratic presidential predecessor, who accused Republican obstructionism of blocking a more robust liberal agenda.
Mr Markey said he was convinced that if Mr Biden began to meet the same fate, he would come to support a procedural change in the Senate.
“Deal with the Senate as it exists today,” Mr. Markey said. “And I believe that when and if the key elements of its program are blocked, the administration will see how the obstruction is a hindrance.”
He added: “It is an obstacle to progress and justice.”
Still, progressive activist groups and liberal lawmakers have largely held their own in response to Mr Biden’s stance, responding more with a shrug than a rallying cry. In interviews, several leaders said it was too early to push to remove the filibuster. They also argued that Mr. Biden would change his mind once his promise to “Build Back Better” was confronted with the full reality of Congressional partisanship.
Brian Fallon, the former Hillary Clinton 2016 campaign press secretary, said most activists expected Mr Biden’s initial opposition and incorporated it into their strategies. He predicted Democrats would tie a possible all-out push on eliminating filibuster to a widely supported bill rather than tackling the problem in a vacuum. And for some senators – and the president – it is important that the elimination of filibuster be seen as a last resort.
The New Washington
“Mr. Biden’s rhetoric remains united and conciliatory,” Mr. Fallon said. “But he’s governing in a way that makes me think he’s focused on getting results and having a big impact.”
Mr Fallon added that he was optimistic that before too long Mr Biden and his administration would recognize the need to get rid of the filibuster.
Waleed Shahid, spokesperson for Justice Democrats, a progressive group that backs primaries against more centrist House Democrats, said the stakes in that fight would define Mr Biden’s presidency. His group has not sought to pressure Biden or the Senate Democrats who blocked the removal of the filibuster.
“We have a unique opportunity to make major improvements in people’s lives, and there is no real way to do it without allowing the majority to rule in the Senate,” Shahid said. “Democrats are really on the rise. If they don’t reform the filibuster, they could waste this moment.
As the majority party, Democrats could act to remove the filibuster and force a rule change on a simple majority vote – a move known as blowing up the “nuclear option” – if the 50 members remained together and Vice President Harris cast the deciding vote.
But many Congressional Democrats are reluctant to go that route, giving Mr. Biden sufficient political cover, at least for now.
The moderate Democratic senators who are central to the party’s chances of maintaining a majority – like Joe Manchin III of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona – have firmly reiterated their intention to continue filibuster. When asked if there was a scenario that would change his mind, Mr. Manchin replied, “None. A spokeswoman for Ms. Sinema told the Washington Post that she was “not prepared to change her mind.”
Even among liberal senators, in battlefield states, and in safe blue seats, there is little fervor to remove the filibuster that existed in the Democratic presidential primary. Senators Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock of Georgia, whose victories earlier this month gave Democrats dreams of a united government, largely avoided the question. Senator Dianne Feinstein of California, one of the most liberal states in the country, has often expressed suspicion of ending the tradition.
The minority party has often used filibuster to thwart signature items on the majority party’s agenda, and some Democrats worry that without it they won’t be able to stop Republicans the next time they go. they will control the Senate.
Resistances cloud the shifting political winds of the Democratic caucus and the growing consensus among the grassroots that the party must take a firm stand on Republican obstructionism and stop giving hope for compromise.
Interest Shakir, a political adviser to Mr Sanders who also worked for Harry Reid, the former Senate Majority Leader, said Mr McConnell’s initial refusal to agree on the operating rules could have helped opponents long-term filibuster by giving Democrats a first look. opposition, their agenda will be confronted.
Mr Shakir recounted the 2013 efforts by Mr Reid to eliminate the use of filibuster against all presidential candidates except those in the Supreme Court, who faced a lack of initial support, even among Democrats. Building consensus took time, Shakir said.
“There is no doubt in my mind that Schumer and his staff know all the Democrats who are reluctant to end the filibuster,” he said. “They will spend time working them.”
The desire to eliminate filibuster was once seen as a shaky debate among Washington insiders, until Republican opposition to Mr. Obama’s agenda brought the issue to the fore. Calls to end the filibuster intensified under Mr. Trump’s administration, when Republicans scrapped it for Supreme Court candidates and upheld Judge Neil M. Gorsuch.
In July, supporters received a major boost from Mr. Obama, who presented the tactic as a “relic of Jim Crow” during his eulogy for Congressman Mr. Lewis from Georgia.
Mr Reid, who once supported continued filibustering, now maintains that Republicans exploited tactics to advance an unpopular agenda. “It will not hurt the Senate,” he said in a recent interview. “The Senate will be fine. The congress will be very good.
Some believe Mr. Obama’s change is a foreshadowing of the road Mr. Biden could take, even though the two come from very different political backgrounds. Mr. Obama was a newcomer to Washington at the time of his rise to the presidency, although he sought to show deference to Capitol Hill rules. These rules are woven into the bones of Mr. Biden, a byproduct of nearly half a century as a lawmaker.
Adam Jentleson, another former aide to Mr Reid who recently wrote a book on Senate transformation, said: “You essentially have to be delusional to think that McConnell is preparing to lead Republicans in a renaissance of bipartisan cooperation.
He doesn’t think Mr. Biden is.
“There will be a clear choice between reform or failure,” Jentleson said. “And I am convinced that faced with this choice, Biden will make the right decision.”
[ad_2]
Source link